Government Operations Committee on Nov. 18th, 2025

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to meeting number 15 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates, known as the mighty OGGO.

I'm very pleased to see everyone's faces today and that people are not out in planes or cars driving back to their constituencies, for obvious reasons.

Before we start our meeting with Mr. Bédard, I'm going to see if we can get the usual approval of our budgets, which everyone received copies of.

The first one is for our briefing with the interim PBO, which is $500. Can we get approval for that?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

The second one is mostly video conference expenses for the creation and planning of the Defence Investment Agency. Again, these are upper totals which we never come close to spending. It's $2,750.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

The third one is for our upcoming study on the estimates, which is $1,500 for meals and video conference, etc.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We will consider those passed.

We'll welcome back Mr. Bédard. I suspect that today's meeting will be relatively short. I'm going to suggest that we open the floor, as we did before, to Mr. Bédard to answer questions on our access to files or the documents that we were discussing regarding Stellantis and others.

After Mr. Bédard has answered our questions, I'm going to suggest that we adjourn. I would suggest that the parties then perhaps get together to work out a path forward, and we'll discuss it at our next available open meeting.

We're not going to do a speaking order. We'll just open the floor.

The question order for Mr. Bédard will be Mrs. Block and then Ms. Khalid.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you very much, Chair.

Notwithstanding that Mr. Bédard made opening comments, I'm going to go back and ensure that I understood his presentation, so I do have a few questions that I would like to try to get through. I'll maybe limit it to the first four out of eight that I have, so that others will have the opportunity to ask questions as well.

It is my understanding that there are no limits to parliamentarians' power to send for papers. If there are, what are those limits?

[Michel Bédard, Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel, Office of the Law Clerk and Parliamentary Counsel]

The power to send for records and papers is rooted in the parliamentary privilege of the House and Parliament. It is subject to the limit that Parliament or committees want to set when they ask for documents. They could provide some safeguards regarding the distribution of documents to maintain confidentiality.

Ultimately, the power to send for records is unfettered.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Committees can set their own limits when it comes to their ability to send for papers.

What recourse do we as parliamentarians have if a department does not comply with the order that we have put forward?

[Michel Bédard]

In terms of committees, the power to send for records and papers is delegated from the chamber. If the chamber itself was to set limits, for example, that certain documents are to be consulted only in camera, the committees, as creatures of the House, would have to obey those limits.

Based on the standing powers of standing committees, they have the power to send for records. There's no limit. If a committee asks for documents and they are not provided, the committee has various options. It could decide not to pursue the investigation or the search for these documents. It could decide to compromise and have a discussion with the party that is resisting the provision of documents to see if safeguards or measures that will protect confidentiality will address any concerns that have been expressed. Committees could insist on the production of unredacted documents.

If the committee insists on the production of unredacted documents and the documents are not provided, then the committee cannot itself enforce the failure to provide documents. The committee has to report to the House and then the matter can be raised as a question of privilege in the House of Commons.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Sorry. Just quickly before we go forward, and I'm guilty of this as well, I want to remind everyone to keep the earpieces far away from their mics, please, for our interpreters. Thanks very much.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

A follow-up to that would be, does this differ with organizations external from the Government of Canada? If we were to call for information from Stellantis itself, would our ability to compel those documents or negotiate look different with an external organization, a company, versus a government department?

[Michel Bédard]

The power is the same. However, the concerns that will be expressed by third parties and the government may be different depending on the circumstances. When we're seeking documents from the government, they might be more concerned about solicitor-client privilege, cabinet confidence and other government sensitive information.

If you're dealing with a third party, it could be commercially sensitive information. When you're asking the government for documents, a contract for example, which is relevant in this case, then the government will put forward the same concerns as a third party about commercially sensitive information.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

It's my understanding that....

Okay.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

We have to move on. We can get back.

Ms. Khalid.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

It's okay, let Mrs. Block finish.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Okay.

Go ahead, Mrs. Block.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

It's my understanding that this could be by way of a confidentiality claim. I think you mentioned that in your opening comments to us at the last meeting. When a respondent makes that confidentiality claim, what recourse do parliamentarians have in addressing it?

[Michel Bédard]

If the committee asks for documents and then there's a claim of confidentiality, it is for the committee to decide whether the concerns expressed are sufficient to put safeguards or to insist on the production of documents.

[Kelly Block, Conservative, Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek, SK]

Okay, thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Kelly McCauley]

Thanks, Mrs. Block.

Ms. Khalid.

[Iqra Khalid, Liberal, Mississauga—Erin Mills, ON]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Mr. Bédard, for being here today. We really appreciate your attendance and your knowledge.

To start off, what is your role in terms of providing support to committees? Are you giving us legal advice today, or in terms of answering questions, are you just providing knowledge or awareness?

[Michel Bédard]

I'm providing legal information, legal advice. The Office of the Law Clerk provides legal advice and legal services to the House, committees, members. We will do it on a confidential basis for members, and for committees it will depend on the circumstances. Committees will decide whether or not they want to receive the information, the advice, in camera or in public. I'm here to advise the committee as a whole.